When Did The "Celebrification" of Diana Begin?

[Hallo girl]

The difference in the two divorces was that as part of her divorce Diana signed a confidentiality agreement - Sarah didn't. Whether both were given the choice or not I don't know but Diana it seems got more because she did sign whereas Sarah didn't.

Diana was the mother of a future king, they had to make sure she was self sufficient with no reason to earn money.

 

[Denville]

Diana was the mother of a future king, they had to make sure she was self sufficient with no reason to earn money.

True, of course, but I think that Diana asked for what was considered a lot of money, over and above what would be sufficient for her to live independently and with royal style... still. she knew the RF were eager by then to get rid of her, and she could ask for a large settlement and have a decent hope that they would pay up to get the divorce settled. I think that one of the things they did ask for was non disclosure and a promise to refrain from any commercial work, and Diana was Ok with that because she had no particular desire to work as such. Having said that I think she did have a sneaking desire to dabble in acting or dancing but she knew taht it was not really on for her to become a film star.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

True, of course, but I think that Diana asked for what was considered a lot of money, over and above what would be sufficient for her to live independently and with royal style... still. she knew the RF were eager by then to get rid of her, and she could ask for a large settlement and have a decent hope that they would pay up to get the divorce settled. I think that one of the things they did ask for was non disclosure and a promise to refrain from any commercial work, and Diana was Ok with that because she had no particular desire to work as such.

She initially demanded 70 million but that was rejected and she got a more reasonable amount. She wasn’t poor even before receiving the money because she had a trust fund that came from her American ancestress, Frances Ellen Work.

Diana was the mother of a future king, they had to make sure she was self sufficient with no reason to earn money.

She had a trust fund before she got married from her American ancestress, Frances Ellen Work so she was never going to be poor whether received a good settlement or not from the BRF. It was partly because of the trust fund she had the flat in Chelsea which her parents sold after she got married.

 

[Denville]

She initially demanded 70 million but that was rejected and she got a more reasonable amount. She wasn’t poor even before receiving the money because she had a trust fund that came from her American ancestress, Frances Ellen Work.

no, she wasn't poor, but I doubt if she really asked for 70 million. that's really a high figure to ask for, if she was bargained down to 17 million.I think that Diana was fairly sharp about money, and would have managed to work out with the help of her lawyers, what was the best figure to ask for, prior to bargaining for a more reasonable figure.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

no, she wasn't poor, but I doubt if she really asked for 70 million. that's really a high figure to ask for, if she was bargained down to 17 million.

I don’t know where it said she demanded an amount like that but there was speculation on that, and her office costs were paid for every year.

 

[Denville]

I don’t know where it said she demanded an amount like that but there was speculation on that, and her office costs were paid for every year.

I assumed that you had some kind of thing you had read, saying that her original demand was for 70 Million.. since you mentioned it in a previous post. I never read that anywhere, but I think she did ask for a very high figure at first, but I doubt if it was as much as 70M, nad then she haggled but hoped that the fact that Charles nad the queen wanted to get divorce done and sorted would make them give in to a decent figure like 17M. I belieive that chras had to borrow from the queen to get that much money but he did so.

 

[Alison H]

I suppose what she could have done was a docu-film about her charities, which to some extent she did when she was filmed visiting sites where there were land mines. I still don't think that a brief cameo would have been a problem, but I don't see that she could have had a lead role in a film. I don't think she wanted to. She never showed any particular interest in acting, and she may have find it hard to have to start learning lots of lines: there's a lot more to acting than looking glamorous.

Didn't the issue of Grace Kelly returning to making films after her marriage arise? I think Alfred Hitchcock approached her. Different situation, I know.

The woman in that photo doesn't look like Diana to me.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

I assumed that you had some kind of thing you had read, saying that her original demand was for 70 Million.. since you mentioned it in a previous post. I never read that anywhere, but I think she did ask for a very high figure at first, but I doubt if it was as much as 70M, nad then she haggled but hoped that the fact that Charles nad the queen wanted to get divorce done and sorted would make them give in to a decent figure like 17M. I belieive that chras had to borrow from the queen to get that much money but he did so.

I think it was a documentary or some publication where I saw it, but either way her initial demands were for higher payout (figure unknown) and we now that it was a reasonable sum of close to 20 million or so. Yes Charles had to borrow from the Queen to pay off the settlement. Thank you

 

[Denville]

I suppose what she could have done was a docu-film about her charities, which to some extent she did when she was filmed visiting sites where there were land mines. I still don't think that a brief cameo would have been a problem, but I don't see that she could have had a lead role in a film. I don't think she wanted to. She never showed any particular interest in acting, and she may have find it hard to have to start learning lots of lines: there's a lot more to acting than looking glamorous.

Didn't the issue of Grace Kelly returning to making films after her marriage arise? I think Alfred Hitchcock approached her. Different situation, I know.

The woman in that photo doesn't look like Diana to me.

I think a cameo would have been a problem.. commercialising her position as a mother of the heir to the throne and someone with the title of Princess. Fergie needed money so she did the appearance in Friends.. but that was Fergie.
The Grace situation was different, in that I think that Grace didn't quite grasp that marrying a prince would put restrictions on her, and she toyed with the ideea of going back to acting. but Rainier and the Mon public would not like the thought of tehir princess playing a kleptomaniac on screen....

 

[Elan]

In the scene itself, there is a quality coming thru that is remarkably close to Diana ( :25 )

 

[Curryong]

It’s not Diana. If there had been any chance of Diana being in a Hollywood film like Top Gun the British media would have spotted it at the film’s release all those years ago and all hell would have broken loose.

During her years as Princess of Wales BP knew where she was at all times, even when she was in the countryside with one of her lovers.

Do you really think that Diana would have been able to travel by plane out of the country, film a couple of scenes in a film in LA and gone unspotted by anyone there in cars, hotels? She was as loved and well known in the US as she was in the UK.

 

[Elan]

It’s not Diana. If there had been any chance of Diana being in a Hollywood film like Top Gun the British media would have spotted it at the film’s release all those years ago and all hell would have broken loose.

During her years as Princess of Wales BP knew where she was at all times, even when she was in the countryside with one of her lovers.

Do you really think that Diana would have been able to travel by plane out of the country, film a couple of scenes in a film in LA and gone unspotted by anyone there in cars, hotels? She was as loved and well known in the US as she was in the UK.

Appreciate you highlighting those points.. Where my position has changed from a fantastic belief in a cameo, to : speculate on how an uncredited extra in a film could do a thing, that high paid professionals did not do quite as well. There could well be some type of shared Dna in the respective bloodline, ancestry, imo.

 

[Denville]

She could not have done it back then as a working princess and after the divorce, as i've said, Im pretty sure her div agreement had conditions against her doing any kind of commerical work. and that girl does not even look like her.

 

[Elan]

_____

 

[Curryong]

I appreciate that 99% of the actresses chosen in TV movies to portray Diana only bear a passing resemblance to her. It’s unfortunate, but there it is. However, we can’t see this uncredited actress full face, and in fact, looking at her again in profile Diana had a very different nose, chin/facial bone structure.

My main objection to this woman being Diana is purely on logistics however, as I’ve stated in my previous posts. It would have been absolutely impossible for someone as constantly pursued by paps and press as she was as Prss of Wales, to fly out of the country to appear in a Hollywood film.

And, as I’ve said before, if the likeness to Diana was that strong any British journalist, royal photographer etc would have spotted it when Top Gun was first released in the UK.

 

[Prinsara]

Besides, Diana was 5'10", and the actress is undoubtedly wearing heels. I don't know how tall Val Kilmer is, but I doubt he'd be leaning down that much to the real Diana.

 

[Curryong]

Diana’s face had thinned down by 1986, especially in profile as the photo of she (in blue) and Charles sitting side by side on the trip to Canada taken from the side, shows.

https://www.readersdigest.com.au/cu...c-photos-of-prince-charles-and-princess-diana

 

[Denville]

look it simply would not happen. i suppose it is just possible that Diana might have had a brief moment of feeling she'd like to take part in a movie just for funsies, but there is just no way that she would have been allowed to do so. she was in the public eye a lot, and would not have had the time to slip away to america for time off to do something like this. during her separation from Charles, she had more free time, but the press were on her tail a lot. I think she took holidays back then during hte last few years where she managed to elude the press for a bit, but it always came out later. like she pursued her affair with Hoare for a time, I think without the press knowing, until she got involved in the phone calls thing and then the press found out. but this film was made when she and C were still a working married royal couple.
if she really had done this, |Im sure that soemone would have talked since then and we would have had stories about Di's movie career, how Diana took part in a big movie as an extra,